From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7A03ECE560 for ; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 20:00:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73FC621477 for ; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 20:00:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="ZwbmRny8" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 73FC621477 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728020AbeIPBUw (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Sep 2018 21:20:52 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f68.google.com ([209.85.167.68]:37566 "EHLO mail-lf1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727549AbeIPBUw (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Sep 2018 21:20:52 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f68.google.com with SMTP id t140-v6so4683103lff.4; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 13:00:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:subject:to:cc:references:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GvGclNcw+eYmdMZ9yAzYUL73NmsnJf00Z1fgB2kN0WE=; b=ZwbmRny8zmRBcvyGfYFQ4fg5g00e0ow2BFPfmksYuCBfZ7AjxSv3n4k46jJ8wfGDcI PcWZuhufrkVZYyOr4s/fIprCgOyGV3uYwz+gDmbpKa+llIPkBTCBJIKOplb2HOh4CRiz WFi57rjOJ3iVgKPuAMP2nRWmr4LuWygacXqVrtKuBrR+w6ee9HCBkYArB0+ovbkRMqRh aBStOt/RlU4STDMcmyZsKNWRlqVEK6Ap7kihtA9FuArd/3EKFNABk0Iv953oZwR+etgl CabLYaEjzp9wSOguhKZRzCvuhShkjUIZx/r6puoI94Gjoj52VayPRMaH69DErGCwN/FM SzOA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:to:cc:references:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=GvGclNcw+eYmdMZ9yAzYUL73NmsnJf00Z1fgB2kN0WE=; b=E0tzayoNTp9gAesjmFv6OK7pVKLvMA6vH5dUCvjtUEhmTs8QmTBf+7AP4xX6MNC4xW 7ofOh3Nt8W4koBWT04K1FqvefMFRIIfQ02yUP0p2AohUysmxJ3S0n6rxpjvj+gkjmGEI 1Enxp4fGVzcAT498ae9J4uKff4FL+nVg8NxH0F0seX5dwvok7T52TiZP9dPk4sb2hTbz xyiPXZ6KQD3KCIbjXerGx5VyxyaZjaB4Yf3v6XkKWbjfOTUKOU8fxUbeq1OqQ07Hhiyh HCESuHwlBXNlFT8EBWXBJGOO9+aFdkIGFXdEj1b5k5SC7UGg7itvQ2O1ao8O1KJ8rscl B35A== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51BpiKUeD9xYgrNeKYlExrpnxYRVITol5trm+SS6HQW4R56HkTgE uhz4RTc9Xbdm3lLpgZGdh+mQvigp X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZISayKoZFBmLGfN1ZJxCfGaXAzOK/C2IkjTf3GOmDZofDfAHvw8PeOvt6Yndj16LtDp1vXTQ== X-Received: by 2002:a19:8f8c:: with SMTP id s12-v6mr12085941lfk.83.1537041640936; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 13:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.18] (bku9.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl. [83.28.188.9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p11-v6sm1920380ljc.50.2018.09.15.13.00.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 15 Sep 2018 13:00:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Jacek Anaszewski Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] dt-bindings: ti-lmu: Remove LM3697 To: Pavel Machek Cc: Dan Murphy , robh+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org References: <20180911170825.17789-1-dmurphy@ti.com> <20180911170825.17789-2-dmurphy@ti.com> <20180911200530.GA28290@amd> <85ab3bf4-21d4-dda9-a7c8-5ed68f15c611@ti.com> <20180912214938.GA30654@amd> <7950fa32-c8f9-52bb-06b0-0c1cc93b6bc9@ti.com> <20180914081822.GA21830@amd> <9c14ee7c-f172-bb0c-d9a8-8aeee408f716@gmail.com> <20180914214220.GA2081@amd> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 22:00:37 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180914214220.GA2081@amd> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Pavel. On 09/14/2018 11:42 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > >>> You may want to learn more about device tree and/or talk to the device >>> tree maintainers. This is an old article. https://lwn.net/Articles/561462/ >> >> The article title is "Device trees as ABI". A device tree is defined >> in the "*.dts" file that is then compiled to a dtb blob, which >> constitutes the ABI. And this ABI should be kept backwards compatible. >> >> What is discussed here is a documentation of bindings, i.e. according >> to ePAPR: "requirements for how specific types and classes of devices >> are represented in the device tree". >> >> >From the bindings documented in the >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/ti-lmu.txt only >> ti,lm3532-backlight is used in the mainline dts file >> (arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-droid4-xt894.dts). >> >> Having the above it seems that there is no risk of breaking any >> users. > > DTBs and bindings are supposed to be portable between operating > systems. You are right there are no _mainline_ _Linux_ users. No mainline users means no users we should care of. Other people also don't care - see patch [0]. >>> NAK on this patch. I see that this binding has problems, but >>> introducing different binding for subset of devices is _not_ a fix. >>> >>>>> What about the multi function devices? They should have same binding. >>>> >>>> The MFD devices defined are not in contention here only the SFD. >>> >>> I'd like to see common solutions for SFD and MFD, as the hardware is >>> similar, and that includes the code. Having code that is easier to >>> maintain is important, and having many drivers are harder to maintain >>> than one driver. >>> >>> Milo's code looks better than yours in that regard. I disagree about >>> Milo's code being "nightmare" to modify, and care about "easy to >>> maintain" more than "binary size". >> >> Easy to maintain will be a dedicated LED class driver. > > You mean, 3 dedicated LED class drivers and 3 MFD drivers with LED > parts? We'll need complex driver anyway, and I'd really like to have > just one. In the LED subsystem we can wrap common functionalities into a library object. MFD driver will be able to reuse it then. [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap.git/commit/?h=droid4-pending-v4.19&id=d774c7e447ac911e73a1b3c775e6d89f0422218c -- Best regards, Jacek Anaszewski